ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION and Green Fantasies

[pippop]

I wonder how she thought it up; I bet it's a play on an existing well-known phrase or saying.

[jean]

It's based on You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.

The story is that she was challenged to use horticulture in a sentence.

[pippop]

Once, when challenged to use fascinate in a sentence I said:

"My coat's got ten buttons but I can only fascinate...."








I'll get me (aforementioned) coat.

[jean]

I have outlived
my youthfulness
so a quiet life for me

where once
I used to
scintillate

now I sin
till ten
past three

(Roger McGough, not me)

[pippop]

I like that and him.

[marchesarosa]

The Australian Experiment: When challenged about the failure of a wind farm to produce electricity when the winds fail, a favorite response of the wind promoters is that if sufficient farms are built over a broad area then the entire system will produce even if the winds fail on a few farms. The amount of excess capacity needed never seems to enter the discussion. It is important to remember that the electrical grid operator (distributor) must balance electricity output with consumption within fairly tight tolerances, or the entire system fails.

A paper in the peer-reviewed British journal, Energy and Environment, describes a study of the production from 21 farms spread out over the grid for eastern Australia which is described as, geographically, the largest, most widely dispersed, single interconnected grid in the world. Unlike many studies, such as the ones by the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) which relied on computer models, this study relies on hard data. The results are grim, but not unexpected.

The study focuses on the year 2010, which was, apparently, not significantly different from other years. The study uses an unusually low standard of 2% of installed capacity for the Minimum Acceptable Level (MAL). It relies on data provided by the grid operator that covers average power output over five minutes. Shorter time periods are preferable and instantaneous output is ideal.

For 2010, the entire fleet (the combined output of all wind farms) failed to produce 2% of installed capacity 109 times. The longest period was for 70 minutes. One wind farm, described as typical, failed 559 times in the six months. The longest period was for 2.8 days. Not only does the entire fleet fail frequently, but also it fails throughout the year. Clearly, such performance would be unacceptable for any traditional method of generating electrical power.

After analyzing the data, the authors state that wind cannot be used for base load (the daily minimum requirement) and that the installed capacity of required back-up must be at least 80% of installed wind farm capacity. In eastern Australia the required back up is open cycle gas turbines (basically jet engines) which are far less efficient than closed cycle gas turbines. But the closed cycle systems cannot react sufficiently quickly to variation of wind power output. Further, the open cycle turbines must be operating constantly on stand-by mode, wasting energy when the electricity is not needed.

Wind power promoters, and their supporting politicians, are leading the public into an expensive wind trap.

WIND FARMING IN SOUTH EAST AUSTRALIA
Andrew Miskelly and Tom Quirk
aefweb.info/data/Wind%20farming%20in%20SE%20Australia.pdf

[marchesarosa]

The industrialising and developing world must be gobsmacked (and grateful) for the way leading industrialised nations of the West are crucifying themselves with this strange fad for what amounts to the holy grail of energy production - "renewables".

Of course, this is precisely what the Greens want - de-industrialisation of the West.


Meanwhile in Greenland.....
cphpost.dk/news/national/government-leaning-toward-allowing-uranium-mining-greenland

[aubrey]

Nuclear and oil don't require any subsidies, do they?

Actually, if the greens were serious about de-industrialisation (which sounds more like a 70s Dr Who plot* than anything serious) then they wouldn't want renewable energy, would they? They'd want no energy. Though I suppose they keep that bit quiet, for political reasons.


*Actually, it was a 70s Dr Who plot.

[marchesarosa]

Oil has certainly not required subsidy to get it out of the ground (indeed the tax, the very opposite of subsidy, on oil at the petrol pump is astronomical as a proportion of the pump price) and neither has coal or gas. If coal was to some extent subsidised pre-privatisation it was a subsidy for the preservation of jobs, not a subsidy for extraction, as no doubt you are aware.

If nuclear requires subsidy it is justifiable on the grounds that it is reliable and keeps the lights burning when the wind don't blow and the sun don't shine.

Ask France if it would like to replace its nuclear generation with renewable, perhaps? Ask Germany how it will manage without relying on France's nuclear generated electricity, perhaps, after precipitately closing down its own nuclear power stations?

[aubrey]

Oil companies get big tax breaks.

[marchesarosa]

All companies and the self-employed get "tax breaks", aubrey. These are the deductions of operating expenses and investment in productive capacity against income. The balance is what is taxed.

If you chose to describe "tax breaks" incorrectly as "subsidies" more fool you.

The oil industry has been a source of huge tax income for government. This is precisely the opposite of a "subsidy" which flows from government to, in this case, the renewables industry and land owners. But would an ex-coalminer know the difference? Apparently not, in your case.

[aubrey]

Well, as you say, the industry as a whole has produced a lot of income for the Govt, a hell of a lot of it from the ultimate consumer, not the producers.

They get big tax breaks, and also shuffle their profits around to avoid as much as they can. Legal, but not ethical.

[marchesarosa]

Ah, now you are changing the subject, aubrey! Wise man. You were on shaky ground before mixing up tax break and subsidy.

I suppose you also have difficulty with tax cuts, too? That's when the state decides to TAKE LESS from its citizens. It does not involve any "giving" at all. It is simply allowing citizens to KEEP MORE in their pockets. Whether that is a wise decision is another matter entirely.

[marchesarosa]

Now, at 9.30am on a VERY cold Sunday morning, the UK is generating a mighty 4.27% of its electricity from windmills.

www.ukenergywatch.org/Electricity/Realtime

Electricity Generation by Category

Generation Type..................Power Produced

Combined Cycle Gas Turbine..... 7,099 MW
Open Cycle Gas Turbine..................0 MW
Oil..............................................0 MW
Coal.....................................18,053 MW
Nuclear..................................7,850 MW
Wind......................................1,597 MW
Pumped Storage Hydro................421 MW
Non Pumped Storage Hydro..........236 MW
Interconnect - France..................653 MW
Interconnect - Ireland.....................0 MW
Interconnect - Netherlands...........782 MW
Other........................................730 MW

Total......................................37,421MW

Updated: 24 February 2013 09:05:00
Settlement Date: 24 February 2013

Coal, of course, is reliably producing the lion's share at 48.24%, as usual.

[marchesarosa]

bishophill.squarespace.com/storage/Blackout_britain.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1361748190179


Blackout Britain: EU Eco-Directive Puts Millions at Risk of Power Cuts

One million homes narrowly escaped a power cut last month as bitterly cold weather placed a massive strain on Britain’s creaking electricity network. And as a spell of bitter cold once more hits the UK, the near switch-off which came so perilously close on that freezing afternoon, underscores the magnitude of the energy crisis.

BRITISH MEDIA DECLARE ALL-OUT WAR ON GREEN ENERGY LOBBY
more here
www.thegwpf.org/british-media-declares-all-out-war-green-energy-lobby/